Posted
by
Zonk
on Sunday January 20, 2008 @03:42PM
from the learning-is-half-the-battle dept.

russoc4 writes "Most people who play the United States Army's freeware FPS sit through training simulations so that they may be able to get into the action and rack up some kills. The medic skills learned in the training allow you to heal teammates in the game, but it seems that they also apply in real life situations. According to Wired and the America's Army forums, 'a North Carolina man who saw an SUV flip and roll on a highway last November was able to provide medical aid to the victims with skills he learned from the America's Army.'" See? We learn things from videogames! Feign Death works sometimes, too.

America's Army also helped me learn the exact angle at which to fire a 203 as soon as I come out of a tunnel near the bridge to hit the guys getting out of the convoy on the other side! And to close doors in people's faces if I think they have a grenade! And always fire machine guns into vents if I think there might be movement! AA is incredibly educational.

No. Now they have a valid excuse to ban violent games. I can hear it now: "We've been trying to tell you for years that doing something in a game can teach you how to do it real life. Today it was someone who learned how to save a life. Tomorrow it will be someone who learned how to take it."

The worst part is they kind of have a point. Every time violence in games comes up, our first counter-argument has always been that games and reality are different and the skills don't translate across. So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

It's one thing for the skills to translate to real life-- the whole point of America's Army, after all, is a combat simulator. So you learn some first aid, and you also learn some combat tactics.

The real question isn't whether the game gives you knowledge, but whether the game makes you more likely to do something you wouldn't do otherwise. Do you have more of an inclination to find people to bandage after doing it in game? Probably not, no more than you would be more inclined to shoot somebody.

The worst part is they kind of have a point. Every time violence in games comes up, our first counter-argument has always been that games and reality are different and the skills don't translate across. So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

I would disagree with one little bit: skills do translate across. Behaviour needn't.

Any skill you learn in any kind of context will translate across. Behaviour depends on a greater number of factors.

So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

Or, we could claim that you only learn stuff applicable in real-life from games that are as anal about realism as America's Army is. Dunno how it is nowadays, but back when I played it (when they still had a Linux version), to get to play as a medic you had to attend an in-game class (which was quite long), and then take a test about what they'd taught you in it. Pretty f'in far from the likes of GTA, which are the usual targets of anti-videogames propaganda.

It wouldn't surprise me either to hear about some guy being able to fly a small plane without formal training if he had played Flight Simulator for years with a specialized controller, whereas I *would* be surprised if he had managed to do so after just a couple of weeks playing Battlefield 1942 and UT2004.

I spent 15 minutes reading a first aid manual when I was a kid. Amazing how much of the "medical help learned in America's Army" is just common sense and first aid basics. That ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.

Sheesh. Keeping wounds above heart level keeps the blood from spurting out as rapidly. That's basic physics mixed with basic anatomy or first aid. These were actually taught in 4th to 7th grade in most of the eastern block commie countries not that long ago. In the meanwhile they've "westernized" also. In other words, they now attend twice as much school and get half as much education. IMHO, its all the more reason to teach your own kids, presuming, of course, that you've got some actual knowledge to impart and can offer them a good start in the experience that is life and didn't just breed pointlessly as most humans today do.

I would like to see this info you have on other countries' 12-year-olds' first-aid skills. It sounds fascinating. As a teacher who has taught 3-12 grades and as a Scoutmaster, I also have noticed that schools have nothing at all like the first-aid training that is given to Boy Scouts.

Makes me wonder what part of the core curriculum should be dropped to accommodate it, or how many new days should be added to the school year for this, or how many minutes should be added to the school day for first-aid trai

Which part to drop? One week of football/t-ball/whatever. Seems to me First Aid fits in perfectly with Physical education and should be part of it. Assume 8 years in elementary school, take one week out of 'gym class' per half-year... and you've 16 weeks of first aid training (mind you would assume first 4 years be really basic).

If they can spend a week in gym discussing STDs (at least my high school did), can't see why they can't take one week to teach some first aid. After all, aren't physical education teachers supposedly taught some themselves to hold the position?

That ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.

Basil Exposition: The shouting is a temporary side-effect of the unfreezing.DaedalusHKX (660194): Yes... I'm having difficulty controlling THE VOLUME OF MY VOICE.

I just got off the phone with him.He's suing the US Army for undermining his position. And he's including gay soldier porn with the filing.*-nB

*because it's Jack: The aforementioned statement was not meant to represent that I know or spoke with Jack Thompson (who is known to file gay porn for some weird reason), nor is anything other than the statement that Jack sees some (weird) reason to file gay porn meant to be a statement of fact. It is this posters opinion that Jack is deranged enough to actually sue the US Army, and in his style would file gay porn, in addition I am positing that Jack would try to stay with the theme and make it gay soldier porn in his posting. If Jack is willing to go with Lesbian soldier porn I will consider reading his filing for spelling errors. Also this disclaimer and all of this post is this posters opinion and makes no assertions of fact or prior knowledge. This is because even though I believe my opinions are true, Jack may not. Then he would sue me. Then I would have to go make a violent video game of me dying via Gay Soldier Porn, to prove some weird point to Jack so he would donate to the charity of my choice (Shriners hospital in Sac CA please), then he would renege [joystiq.com] on it and PennyArcade [joystiq.com] would have to step up on it again.

I've heard a ton of stories about lawsuits against doctors / hospitals due to negligance or whatever the lawyer wants to call it.If I were a doctor in America I wouldn't go near a dying patient. I'd be bound to get the blame. It's that old adage, you can do a thousand rights, but one wrong and you are disgraced. Sadly, in todays world, I'd probably just walk on by lest there be a lawsuit if I tried to help and failed.

You know a lot of schools, and workplaces aren't even allowed to stock standard

And if anything goes wrong, the guy AND the game makers will get sued for millions.

As far as rendering first aid to an accident victim, most states have a Good Samaritan law which exempts the person trying to render first aid from legal recourse. The game maker probably has some extremely small print disclaimer somewhere which states that they can not be held liable for anything in or resulting from participating in the game. It wouldn't suprise me if the disclaimer probably states something along the

There are limits to what a non-certified person can do. At least thats I'm taught when I get re-certified every year, that it will prevent you from being sued under the good samaritan law, in Indiana at least.

Right. I'm "certified" for first aid but at a lower level and have no idea how I'd react in an emergency like this type of situation. I like to think that I wouldn't lock up and hopefully be able to find someone more capable than myself.

Yet if you're "certified" and identify that at an accident you become liable for the victims until EMS or professional aid arrives. If something happens to them (death or worse injury) whether or not it's your fault, your balls are still on the line. You can and most likely will be sued. This is why off-duty ems and doctors aren't always willing to respond to nearby incidents.
Sure it'd be a nice fantasy world where we could help everyone and be safe, but this is America... Land of the Sued.

People are close on good samaritan laws, but not exact (at least going by what they've told me every time I've taken a first aid course here in California). There are two legal issues to consider.

Once you begin providing aid, you must continue to provide aid until you can hand off to someone who is at least as qualified as you. This is why doctors don't like to get involved, because they are unable to hand off to any sort of EMT or medic, only to another doctor who is at least as qualified as them.

Nope, most states have laws in place to protect "good samaratins" from legal reprecusions. Generally speaking, if you were genuinely trying to help and your help was not specifically denied or the victim was unable to respond one way or another then regardless of the outcome you will not be prosecuted or be held liable for trying to render assistance, however bumbling and ineffective that assistance may turn out to be, in good faith.

Good Samaritan laws dont hold up in court if youre a Medical Professional. Ie Nurse, Doctor.

Yes they do. Your statement is absolutely FALSE. IAAMS (I am a medical student), and this exact question was in one of my Board exam review books. If you drive by a roadside accident, if you are a doctor/nurse/etc then OF COURSE you should be encouraged to help out since you're the one with the knowledge. I mean, this game player did a great thing, but I'm sure an EMS guy driving by would be even better, you know? And Good Samaritan Laws are there to help you do this good deed. You aren't being compensated, and you can't be punished either.

Having played the game extensively, you can't tell me it's an effective recruiting tool. The first thing you realize when you play the game, is that you get killed. A lot. And reliably so, to the point that even the very best of the best players can't go more than 10 or 15 kills without getting shot.

It's almost certainly not propaganda, because it sites a very specific and verifiable incident (and gives the guys name), but either way, it's harmless. No one's playing a game where they get shot all the time and then deciding they want some of that in the real world. The only reason AA is still around is because the Army is essentially the mother of all bureaucracies, and even useless projects frequently don't get cut.

And as an aside, the medic training in the game IS informative. I now know not to give cold water to people suffering from heatstroke (apparently they can go into shock)....And I know the difference between a BMP and a BTR.

The other day it was late at night and my car broke down. I had forgotten my phone and wallet, and needless to say I was SOL. But thanks to my "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" training, I quickly dispatched an old lady in a station wagon who stopped at a nearby traffic signal, and drove home. Thanks "Rock Star", you saved my a$$.

Technically, you can be sued for anything in this country. You could be sued for trying to stop the bleeding, or you could be sued for standing by and doing nothing.

However, if you are going to sue for a stupid reason, your lawyer should be responsible for telling you that you are filing a frivolous case, and not to pursue it. Most lawyers wont take a paper-thin case, but some would rather try for the money. Pursuing frivolous lawsuits is a black mark against them, and if they do it too often they risk being disbarred.

Control bleeding yes - cleaning a wound and controlling bleeding until help arrives is often quite important, and can be useful anywhere, not only on the road but also in the office, at home, or just about and abroad. CPR though is another story. Incorrectly administered it can be more harmful than beneficial, and may in fact be deadly. IMHO it's a bit beyond what the average Joe should be expected to know about emergency aid.

In the US, anybody can be sued, and probably will be sued if their actions may in any way have contributed to someone's death. Good Samaritan laws only mean that after they've gone through the expense and humiliation of defending themselves, if a jury finds that they acted in good faith, they can't be held liable. N.B., outside of North America, Good Samaritan laws [wikipedia.org] usually denote an affirmative responsibility to assist someone in need in an emergency situation (as well as the pursuant lack of liability therefrom).

Human beings learn things in lots of different ways. People learn both correct and incorrect behaviour from watching TV for example. The trick is to learning how realistic the information and techniques you are getting are, and when they can actually be applied.

For example it's easy to learn the wrong thing from a TV show. Try and play MacGyver for instance and things might go pear shaped. More subtley here in Australia the number for emergency services is 000, but we have had critically ill people receive delayed medical care because people have dialed 911 after watching American TV.

Why should games be any different? They're interactive so if the simulation is accurate they should be better at teaching us how to react to a situation.

However like television, usually the primary reason people play games is for entertainment not education. I'm not a betting man but I'd be surprised if you couldn't pick up many many more skills by doing a weekend firstaid course than by playing Americas Army.

True. . . but it's also true that, at least for MacGuyver, they were at least responsible enough to leave out critical ingredients or steps for dangerous things, and NOT leave things out for life-savers "improvised" for the show.

True. . . but it's also true that, at least for MacGuyver, they were at least responsible enough to leave out critical ingredients or steps for dangerous things, and NOT leave things out for life-savers "improvised" for the show.

Yes they made some rudimentary attempt but that doesn't mean that doing the things he did won't get you into trouble.

I was watching a couple of episodes with my wife last night. The character fixed a brake canister gasket with a piece of PVC. Not recommended even for a temporary fix

"In 1991, the European Union established 1-1-2 as the universal emergency number for all its member states. In most E.U. countries, 1-1-2 is already implemented and can be called toll-free from any telephone or any cellphone. The GSM mobile phone standard designates 1-1-2 as an emergency number, so it will work on such systems even in North America. In the UK and Republic of Ireland, the number is 9-9-9 with 1-1-2 working in parallel." (from wikipedia)So maybe there will be a worldwide standard someday!

Mod this guy up he has a valid point. What was 911 taken already? If I was on vacation in Australia and there was an emergency I would dial 911... how the hell would I know about 000?

There should be a single International standard. However take responsibility for your own actions. Traveling internationally and assuming that things work the same way overseas as they do in your country is dangerously stupid. Many countries distribute literature at the airports (welcome to such and such country) that outlines

For those of you who haven't played AA, Medic Training consists of walking into a classroom, sitting down, looking at the screen, and listening to a lecture. Then you take a multiple choice exam. So, there's a real possibility of learning something.

If I remember correctly, when I played through all of the training to unlock everything a few years ago, all of the answers were available online and I just did something else while the lecture played... so much for learning how to dress a wound while I wanted to be shooting some terrorists.

One day I was driving down the road when my car turned off. Turned out the timing belt snapped. Good thing I was a squad leader because I just requested a vehicle drop and the commander delivered right away. While I used that car a fellow teammate started to fix my other car with a "magic wrench".

Before Patch 1.3 this was not possible for cars to be dropped. Thank goodness for this new gift from EA.

BF2 encouraged me to become a medic. I played a lot of BF2 and BF2142 and always used the medic kit or the assault class with a medic loadout.

It fostered in me a desire to obtain basic medical skills. Just as it is helpful to be able to revive your comrad in the game, I thought it would be helpful to be able to render real aid to a person in an accident.

So I registered for an EMT-B certification class and after about 120 hours of class time and 24 hours of on-site training, I was qualified to take the exam and am now a certified EMT-B and considering pursing the certification all the way up to paramedic.

I will do it only on a volunteer basis - I already have a profession - but it is a worthwile skill and I am glad I obtained it.

Paxton Galvanek pulled one of the passengers out of the smoking car, then found another bleeding heavily from his hand where his fingers had been lost during the crash.

A very, very VERY important rule regarding assisting someone who is injured, and this applies to bike, pedestrian vs. car, car vs. car, and motorcycle accidents:

Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious. Immediate danger means the car is on fire, for example, AND unconscious. If the are in immediate danger but conscious, ASSIST them (ie, help open the door or smash the window, cut the belt, etc but let them move themselves. If they are in no danger but conscious, encourage them to LIE STILL; shock keeps them from feeling injuries. Leave everything you can to those trained in what to do.

For example, the first thing bystanders LOVE to do is rip off a motorcyclist's helmet. Helmets are pretty snug and this causes a lot of pull on their neck/spine. If they've' got a neck/back injury, you can turn them from "I'll walk in a few weeks after an operation" to "I'll be in a wheelchair the rest of my life because you ripped apart my spinal cord trying to be a hero." The rule for helmets is simple: if they're breathing, it stays on. If they stop breathing, that takes priority. Some motorcycle riders are now installing inflatable bladders that harmlessly lift the helmet off their head and have a blood-pressure-cuff inflator attachment for the crew to use, and some ambulances are equipping themselves with the version that can be slipped up into the helmet.

Many riders put labels on their helmets that say "DO NOT REMOVE MY HELMET UNLESS I HAVE STOPPED BREATHING" because all of the idiot bystanders who think it's important to do.

Also: fire extinguishers are meant to be used to save people, not save cars. If you have someone trying to get out of a car that has a small fire in the engine compartment and you use up the extinguisher trying to put it out- now you have someone still in the car, a fire, and an empty extinguisher. If you have one, use it to protect people in the car should the fire spread far enough while someone else assists the occupants in getting out.

Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious

This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.

I've just looked it up (DK First Aid Manual authorised by the British Red C

This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.

It depends on the situation. If your manual doesn't explain that, then the organizations that wrote the manual need to write a better manual. (No disrespect to the groups you named, whose training has undeniably saved a lot of lives over the years.)

A person who is unconscious due to drowning, poisoning (including alcohol overdose), or unknown reasons that do not obviously result from trauma (probably some internal medical condition, cardiovascular or neurological) certainly should be should be placed in the recovery position. But a person who is unconscious due to trauma, such as a motor vehicle accident or a fall or a blow to the head, emphatically should not be moved without proper equipment -- at least a cervical collar, preferably c-collar and backboard -- used by trained medical personnel. It takes a fair amount of trauma to the brain to cause unconsciousness in an otherwise healthy person, and the chance that the trauma involved also caused some spinal injury is very, very high.

I'm speaking here as a former USAF medic and civilian EMT with ten years' experience in emergency response. If you don't believe me, ask any ER/Casualty doctor or nurse -- I guarantee you'll get the same answer.

Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious

This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.

You may well have learned that. In actuality, the rolling of a person into that position is designed to have the least possible risk of spinal cord injuries. The course did though tell you not to move (as in drag them around, lift them, etc) unless absolutely necessary. (They are in imminent danger, or there is absolutely no possibility of assistance arriving in a useful time frame (for example out hiking in the woods, cell phone cannot connect to 911, and going to find help would result in a high risk of

Also: fire extinguishers are meant to be used to save people, not save cars. If you have someone trying to get out of a car that has a small fire in the engine compartment and you use up the extinguisher trying to put it out- now you have someone still in the car, a fire, and an empty extinguisher.

On the other hand, if that fire gets to the fuel line, you could have a fuel tank explosion on your hands - it's not the fireball-o-rama that you see on TV, but it will throw the car into the air, and probably kil

IF you've been taught proper procedures though, the helmet will come off if the person is unconscious; you need access to the airway whether they're breathing or not.

Why the hell would anyone on the side of the road need "access to someone's airway" if they're breathing, and said bystanders have no medical equipment (unless, of course, there's a Rescue Rodger on the scene.) The only reason you remove a person's helmet if they've been in a motorcycle crash is because you need to perform CPR to keep them

I used to be a firefighter. Please, if you have the fire extinguisher available and the fire is small enough to knock it out early: use it. Saving it until the end, as the OP is suggesting, won't work as the fire has now grown beyond the capability of your typical 5# dry chem extinguisher to put out.

People aren't trained to know what is 'in capability of a typical 5lb dry chem unit', and they're almost never trained in how to use an extinguisher effectively. What if they try to fight it, and fail? Now

Everything I needed to know about warfare and life I learned from Metal Gear. Yeah, that's right. The original.

You can infiltrate classified military installations by disguising yourself as an innocuous cardboard box. There's nothing more indispensable than a pack of smokes. And nothing in the entire arsenal of the Military-Industrial Complex is as singularly lethal as a ninja.

Two guys, one case undocumented, learn crappy, inadequate first aid from a crappy, simulated lecture in America's Army and it gets a write up, even though the game is about efficiently killing people. I think that's terribly misleading, if not propaganda.Great, he elevated the arm, but I hope he had good reason to move that other guy, because that was *really* dangerous (I'm hoping the smoke was in the passenger compartment and it was truly required, otherwise the guy should be smacked, not praised).

This is why you should not take first aid device from a video game or/.

Never apply a tourniquet unless the bleeding is 1) immediately life threatening and 2) cannot be controlled in any other way. The best way to control bleeding is direct pressure - which can stop 99% of significant external bleeding. Tourniquets not only cause nerve damage, but if there is an amputation, they can cause ischemic damage to healthy tissue which may decrease the chance of a successful reattachment or make the ultimate amp

I saw your second comment below, but there is one important thing to remember: training isn't everything, and common sense is often more valuable than training. An untrained bystander who is calm and thinks about what's going on can be more valuable then a hyper-excited volly firefighter who doesn't take two seconds to step back and think.

There is a reason that Brady Emergency Care actually states that you should not transport a live venomous snake with you in the ambulance. Anyone with common sense woul

We need some novelists, educators, engineers, and coders to recast the old trivium [wikipedia.org] and quadrivium [wikipedia.org] as games so that kids can do something valuable like "learn" without doing something boring like "learn".

What they really mean by "America's Army saved a life" is that someone played the game and, based on that experience, realized how dumb it would be to enlist in the U.S. Army just to die for some greedy politicians' personal crusade.

As readers on kotaku.com found out, that is possibly a planted puff piece and might not have actually happened at all:

I went online to find other coverage of this story to see what kind of spin was being put on it. Searching for Paxton Galvanek returned no news results. However, it did point out that he's the president of a marketing firm in New Jersey. Given that the headline mentions "press release" and how there's no source link, I'm going to call this a plant. Unfortunately, I doubt this really happened. It would be good if it did, but given that no news agencies (not even local news) have covered it, and the hero in question is an advertising engine, I'm taking the whole thing with a grain or two of salt.

In the US - and elsewhere - most people have no clue how to help a car accident victim and any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive.

The best thing to do is to stop, observe, and call 911. Trying to do anything else in a car accident situation is almost always going to cause more harm than good.

And in the US, most states have good samaritan laws so that if you are acting in good faith, you are not liable. A few places have laws that compel you to render assistance as well, but they are normally only enforced on TV shows like Seinfeld.

In the US - and elsewhere - most people have no clue how to help a car accident victim and any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive.
The best thing to do is to stop, observe, and call 911. Trying to do anything else in a car accident situation is almost always going to cause more harm than good.

That is so wrong that I am almost speechless (luckily I can still type). The skills you learn in a basic (one day) first aid course can make a huge difference as those courses train you to:

Assess the incident scene and hazards - is it safe to help / is further harm going to take place to the patients

Ensure that the victim does not move - that can cause more injury, especially in a crash where spinal trauma is expected, such as any vehicle collision. They may also be able to stabilize the person to prevent accidental movement.

Check vital signs and if airway, breathing or circulation is not present, clear the airway / perform artificial repsiration / CPR as necessary.

Manage a major bleed

The above isn't as much care as a paramedic or hospital can provide, but good initial response is critical for the safety and health of the victim. If your airway is blocked and you are not breathing, you're facing brain damage within 5 minutes. If you get moved improperly when you have a spinal injury, you're more likely to end up in a wheelchair.

I spent 3 years as a volunteer ski patroller, and 3 years as a volunteer firefighter for a department which averaged a few first medical response calls a week. Sure, I've received a lot more training in the past than a one day course can provide - just my spinal management ticket alone took me a weekend. However, anyone with a recent one day first aid training course can be ready to stop a major bleed, apply CPR, and monitor vital signs so that paramedics know if the victim's condition is deteriorating. Most importantly of all, a trained individual can prevent some stupid and misguided untrained know-it-all (and many such idiots exist) from doing something stupid such as improperly moving a patient with a potential spinal injury, etc.

I strongly believe that everyone should at least have a basic level of first aid training, and carry a small first aid kit in their cars. I carry a lot more than a basic kit, but it provides me a higher level of comfort knowing that I'll have both the tools and the training that I need in event of an emergency. There is nothing sadder to hear than the story of parents whose child died from an incident that basic first aid training could have managed, but they either stood by helplessly, or even worse, exacerbated the situation with their improper efforts to help their child.

Nice post, but I suspect that the GP's point was that *untrained* people would likely cause more harm than good. He's probably right, I don't have any statistics, but it's shocking how few people really know the rudiments of first aid (and keep up on classes which are offered free in many places). Anyway I did want to add something to your response:
I also feel that first aid courses that put a serious focus on vehicle accident response should be a mandatory part of obtaining a driver's license. I'd

I strongly believe that everyone should at least have a basic level of first aid training

And almost no one does. And what someone who either doesn't know what they are doing or did know and has forgotten would do more than likely will make the situation worse.

In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.

The sad thing is that quite a few people with some training would do the same thing, because their training did not cover that. Indeed, the local American Red Cross CPR/First-Aid Instructor mentioned how there where some useful or important things she knew but was not allowed to tell us in the course because the American Red Cross forbids teaching certain things at the lower-level courses because they fear it may confuse the average person (average idiot).

Ensure that the victim does not move - that can cause more injury, especially in a crash where spinal trauma is expected, such as any vehicle collision. They may also be able to stabilize the person to prevent accidental movement.

That sounds pretty close to what you are saying here:

In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.

The training missions to be able to play as a medic are simulated first aid lectures. They have nothing to do with gameplay itself. It's an illustrated presentation and goes through things like how to dress a wound. Having gone through them, this news does make sense. I have to say that the AA training gave me a much better idea about how to approach somebody in shock than I knew before. I can only assume that the lessons are accurate.